The petition was dismissed by the High Court as no case was made ...

Order challenged a year later dismissed for delay, appeal remedy not exhausted.

December 12, 2024

Case Laws GST HC

The petition was dismissed by the High Court as no case was made out to depart from the usual rule of exhaustion of alternative remedies. The key reasons were: 1) An alternative remedy of appeal was available against the impugned order, although the petitioner contended violation of principles of natural justice. 2) The petition was filed almost a year after the impugned orders, much beyond the statutory limitation period for appeal, without any explanation for the delay. While there is no limitation for filing a petition under Article 226, such petitions must be instituted within a reasonable period, and any delay is required to be explained. Since the petitioner failed to provide a justification for the inordinate delay, the High Court dismissed the petition.

View Source

← Previous Next →

The petition was dismissed by the High Court as no case was made ...

Order challenged a year later dismissed for delay, appeal remedy not exhausted.

December 12, 2024

Case Laws GST HC

You may also like:

Validity of order passed u/ss 154/147/143(3) - Disallowance of prior period expenses - Relevant previous year being first year of assessee's business, no prior period...

The High Court dismissed the petition challenging the assessment order u/s 144C of the Income Tax Act. The Assessing Officer clarified that the impugned order was passed...

Challenge to assessment order and rectification order for assessment year 2018-19 - mismatch between GSTR-3B and GSTR-2A/GSTR-2B - order challenged on grounds of...

The High Court dismissed a challenge to a recovery notice u/s 10 years after assessment/re-assessment orders were passed. The petitioner did not appeal timely, leading...

The case involves a 100% Export Oriented Unit (EOU) seeking a refund of excess duty paid along with interest. The EOU had deposited an additional amount of duty as per...

Review of the order - Order 47, Rule 1 r.w.s. 151 of CPC - appeal was dismissed on the ground that the appellant could not show whether it had challenged the earlier...

Rectification of error - Period of limitation - The High Court observed that, there is no limitation prescribed for passing order under Section 22(4) of the TNVAT Act,...

Legality of the penalty orders and assessment orders - as the assessment orders for the assessment years 2009-10 and 2010-11 were based on the penalty orders for the...

Challenge to the recovery notices without challenging the order-in-original - service tax was collected but not paid - the petitioner cannot challenge the consequential order - HC

Jurisdiction to issue show cause notice (SCN) for levy of interest and penalty was challenged. Court held that writ petitions challenging impugned orders under Article...

Validity of assessment orders passed for the years 2018-2019 to 2022-2023 - The High court notes that each assessment order gives rise to a separate cause of action, and...

Petitioner challenged ex-parte order demanding tax liability of Rs. 38,361/- including penalty and interest for wrongful availment of input tax credit on fake invoices....

The Orissa High Court held that the writ petition challenging an order passed under Section 74 of the OGST Act, 2017 was not maintainable due to being filed after the...

Transfer of case u/s 127 - centralization of case after search - delayed challenge to the order passed u/s 153A - the impugned order came to be passed on 19.02.2019 and...

The High Court dismissed the petition and directed the petitioner to exhaust alternate remedies by fulfilling pre-deposit conditions. The court held that no case was...

Quick Updates: